BPI Introduces New Renewal Policy for Certified Home Performance Professionals - Home Energy Pros2015-03-04T00:33:34Zhttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/forum/topics/bpi-introduces-new-renewal-policy-for-certified-home-performance?groupUrl=bpi&commentId=6069565%3AComment%3A107454&groupId=6069565%3AGroup%3A2214&feed=yes&xn_auth=noThanks for your response Lesl…tag:homeenergypros.lbl.gov,2013-03-06:6069565:Comment:1073692013-03-06T18:24:09.907ZGary Baggetthttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profile/GaryBaggett
<p>Thanks for your response Leslie, but the truth be told, as any, if not all the proctors will tell you, there are too many out there with improper knowledge that will easily meet the new criteria for a "pass" on re-certification. There have been some reasonable solutions posted here, whereas what BPI has done, has been so without consultation with it's representatives ..those of us who have worked hard raising the bar as proctors and Test Centers. It's only a guess, but I would think that BPI…</p>
<p>Thanks for your response Leslie, but the truth be told, as any, if not all the proctors will tell you, there are too many out there with improper knowledge that will easily meet the new criteria for a "pass" on re-certification. There have been some reasonable solutions posted here, whereas what BPI has done, has been so without consultation with it's representatives ..those of us who have worked hard raising the bar as proctors and Test Centers. It's only a guess, but I would think that BPI certifications will lose all value within "programs" requiring them. If taking this change, I sure hope you (BPI) also change the test sheets for new certifications. Since people will be able to sit on webinars and have letters written for their re-certs, I sure hope the initial tests get harder. I see this as nothing but problems for the industry, credibility of BPI, and disastrous for homeowners. Do you know how many people I know who will qualify by meeting the new requirements, while having done nothing but improper CHA's for "programs" just in CT alone? The answer is hundreds! Now multiply that by 50 states, and those are some staggeringly disturbing numbers...God help the homeowner! </p> Leslie, your apology is not g…tag:homeenergypros.lbl.gov,2013-03-06:6069565:Comment:1074542013-03-06T18:12:11.307ZMatthew Redmondhttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profile/MatthewRedmond
<p>Leslie, your apology is not good enough. I thought that BPI and the approved testing centers had a partnership. Why was there no detailed explanation of these changes in advance? Your board of directors were even left out of the loop on this change. These are shoddy business practices on the part of your organization.I know of at least two testing centers that are not renewing their agreement with BPI in NY State alone. From my position I expect for BPI to see a significant loss of testing…</p>
<p>Leslie, your apology is not good enough. I thought that BPI and the approved testing centers had a partnership. Why was there no detailed explanation of these changes in advance? Your board of directors were even left out of the loop on this change. These are shoddy business practices on the part of your organization.I know of at least two testing centers that are not renewing their agreement with BPI in NY State alone. From my position I expect for BPI to see a significant loss of testing centers shortly. My center will lose considerable revenue due to these changes. I and many others see this as a lowering of the bar in HP contracting. Why were we not consulted? A graduated system of testing would have kept quality standards high and ensure that health and safety protocols were maintained.</p>
<p>Good job BPI...... </p> On behalf of BPI, we realize…tag:homeenergypros.lbl.gov,2013-03-06:6069565:Comment:1074482013-03-06T17:42:07.290ZLeslie McDowell, BPIhttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profile/LeslieMcDowell
<p>On behalf of BPI, we realize our new recertification policy will be an adjustment for the industry, and especially for BPI Test Centers. In making this change, BPI’s top priority was to keep the standards for work performed high, while also ensuring that the recertification process is accessible and not overly onerous for experienced home performance professionals.</p>
<p>BPI’s Certification Management Board (CMB) made this policy change in response to overwhelming calls from the industry…</p>
<p>On behalf of BPI, we realize our new recertification policy will be an adjustment for the industry, and especially for BPI Test Centers. In making this change, BPI’s top priority was to keep the standards for work performed high, while also ensuring that the recertification process is accessible and not overly onerous for experienced home performance professionals.</p>
<p>BPI’s Certification Management Board (CMB) made this policy change in response to overwhelming calls from the industry for BPI to recognize work experience, and bring our recertification policy in line with building industry norms. The CMB is made up of volunteers representing industry contractors, program managers and manufacturers.</p>
<p>Accepting continuing education in lieu of re-testing is a common method of verifying competency by certifying bodies throughout the technical trades. For example, RESNET, NATE and NABCEP accept continuing education in lieu of re-testing. None of these organizations require field exams to recertify. Indeed, BPI is one of the only certifying bodies in the building trades to require a field exam for a candidate’s initial certification. We will keep this bar high by continuing to require field exams for initial certification and for recertification if work experience cannot be verified.</p>
<p>In addition, BPI recently completed a survey of BPI certified professionals who choose not to renew their certifications. Sixty percent of those surveyed gave the cost and time involved with field testing as their reason not to recertify.</p>
<p>To all of our proctors and test centers:</p>
<p>We owe you an apology for our poor communications. We should have provided you with more details about BPI’s new recertification policy prior to Monday’s announcement. While we discussed the policy on our monthly webinar calls with test centers in January and February, we recognize that this may not be enough information for you to adequately plan for the transition.</p>
<p>We realize this policy may decrease revenue from BPI exams in the short term. However, we expect our new policy to increase demand for BPI CEUs in local markets, and we encourage all test centers to take advantage of this by developing training and curricula that qualify for BPI CEUs. BPI Test Centers do not pay application fees for BPI approval of CEU qualified training.</p>
<p>In addition, there is potential to attract new students to your training centers by providing entry level training to prepare candidates for BPI’s new Building Science Principles (BSP) Certificate of Knowledge exam. BPI has received strong interest in the BSP certification from many parties: manufacturers on behalf of their dealers and distributors, from home inspectors, realtors, appraisers, program administrators and from students interested in green buildings. For more information go to <a href="http://www.bpi.org/certificate">www.bpi.org/certificate</a>.</p>
<p>BPI recognizes the vital role proctors and test centers play in keeping the bar high. We regret the confusion this has caused, and we are committed to working with you to increase training and exam opportunities for BPI Test Centers.</p> Hmmm.
Maybe instead of att…tag:homeenergypros.lbl.gov,2013-03-05:6069565:Comment:1074172013-03-05T23:20:02.197Ztedkiddhttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profile/tedkidd
<p>Hmmm. </p>
<p></p>
<p>Maybe instead of attempting to regulate quality we should incentivize it? How? Create a quantitative, competitive metric for contractors to compete around that reflects ability to deliver on promises: </p>
<p></p>
<p><a href="http://bit.ly/bdvariancepercent" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img class="align-full" src="http://bit.ly/bdvariancepercent"></img></a></p>
<p></p>
<p>For the whole letter/story, click here: …</p>
<p>Hmmm. </p>
<p></p>
<p>Maybe instead of attempting to regulate quality we should incentivize it? How? Create a quantitative, competitive metric for contractors to compete around that reflects ability to deliver on promises: </p>
<p></p>
<p><a rel="nofollow" href="http://bit.ly/bdvariancepercent" target="_blank"><img src="http://bit.ly/bdvariancepercent" class="align-full"/></a></p>
<p></p>
<p>For the whole letter/story, click here: <a rel="nofollow" href="http://bit.ly/febcontractorupdate" target="_blank">http://bit.ly/febcontractorupdate</a></p>
<p></p>
<p></p> Definitely lowering the bar i…tag:homeenergypros.lbl.gov,2013-03-05:6069565:Comment:1072822013-03-05T21:35:06.426ZMatthew Redmondhttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profile/MatthewRedmond
<p>Definitely lowering the bar in HP contracting. Too bad money matters more than quaility in the HP business. It looks like my training/testing center may be the only one left standing in NY State after these changes. As I 've said in other posts, "third party verification of technical competence is the best means to raise quality standards within our industry". Shame on you BPI for lowering your standards !!!</p>
<p>Definitely lowering the bar in HP contracting. Too bad money matters more than quaility in the HP business. It looks like my training/testing center may be the only one left standing in NY State after these changes. As I 've said in other posts, "third party verification of technical competence is the best means to raise quality standards within our industry". Shame on you BPI for lowering your standards !!!</p> Is this proactive or reactive…tag:homeenergypros.lbl.gov,2013-03-04:6069565:Comment:1070452013-03-04T19:18:04.683Ztedkiddhttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profile/tedkidd
<p>Is this proactive or reactive?</p>
<p></p>
<p>I suspect reactive (anecdotal evidence indicated lots of people abandoning Accreditation and Certification renewal)?</p>
<p></p>
<p>There seem no evidence anybody at the helm understands the concept of strategic thinking. So this seems confirmation that mass exodus has begun and they're hoping to staunch the bleeding. </p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p>Bit like closing the barn door after the horses have left. </p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p>Is this proactive or reactive?</p>
<p></p>
<p>I suspect reactive (anecdotal evidence indicated lots of people abandoning Accreditation and Certification renewal)?</p>
<p></p>
<p>There seem no evidence anybody at the helm understands the concept of strategic thinking. So this seems confirmation that mass exodus has begun and they're hoping to staunch the bleeding. </p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p>Bit like closing the barn door after the horses have left. </p>
<p></p>
<p></p>